Socialism for the Rich

How about big pharma paying billy tauzin millions for pushing through legislation that precludes the us federal system from negotiating drug prices?
Or the private prison companies lobbying against mj legalization? Or the telecoms giants lobbying against emc groups from providing high speed
internet for rural locales? Or the mic groups lobbying for wars for profit? Or the massive lobbying by Monsanto and other groups to force their
products into foreign markets through trade treaties? Corporate wealth pushing legislation for their benefit that is detrimental to the rest of us
permeates congress and policy from the top to the bottom. Anytime there’s a question between corporate profit vs the benefit of the masses,
corporate profits win almost every single time.

One primary problem with massive accumulation of wealth in a few hands is that it completely destabilizes democracy, as noted above. Another problem
is that it is a limited sum game. And the vast majority of those making these profits are extractive. Bankers, financiers, rentiers make massive
money. They’re one of the few current growth sectors and are where current gdp growth largely originated. Except they don’t add to gdp.... they
subtract from it. When your bank charges you higher interest rates, penalties, and service fees those actually reduce the amount that you have to
contribute to your economy..... and they do it on a massive scale. In calculating gdp, monies created from unearned income, ie parasites taking the
income from others through increased rents, user fees, interest, should be subtracted from gdp. Groups who take money without earning it through
producing a product that actually requires no labor and time are a drain on the economy. And when those groups lobby Washington to have their products
required or forced upon the American people, ala car or health insurance, etc, this is exploitation.

I’d also like to add an observation. It’s interesting to me that when the govt is taxing folk, taking money the govt doesn’t work for, ideally
to be spent on things that benefit society and the public, conservatives are quick to yell about “theft!!”

And yet when businesses and corporations do that, through interest rate hikes, increases in rents, bank service fees, arbitrary cost increases and
price fixing, all for their own personal profit, they just call that good business.

Those who lobby this leviathan are not the problem. Lobbying and petitioning the government is a democratic right, and sometimes the only means to
have our concerns heard. (Lobbying helped abolish segregation, for example). The problem is those who would trade freedom and democracy for a little
safety.

Like what... Nestle lobbying to privatize water supplies?
Show me one post where you lambast the War on Terror for the same reason. Just one.

Going back to the OP, I see people lobbying for more democracy and against the financial safety of the prevailing TINA mindset. I think you might have
lost it.

Like the NAACP lobbying the government to end segregation. Lobbying is a fundamental part of participatory democracy, and one of the means with which
private citizens can petition their government. And you'd see us denied that right.

Well, that depends on how you define “lobbying” doesn’t it? If by lobbying you mean people organizing and meeting with representatives in order
to persuade them of a specific need or cause, then yes. However if your definition of lobbying includes putting millions into the campaign
contributions, or guaranteeing lucrative multimillion dollar careers after their term ends, well that I think falls more into the realm of corruption
and treason. Lots of terms have been coopted nowadays. Invasion and bombing has become “spreading democracy”. Starving a population of food, money
and medicine has become “strong negotiation “, and bribery, corruption and graft has become “lobbying”. Seriously, the term “free market”
was originally a socialist term referring to a market free from interest/usury, monopolies, price fixing, and economic rent. Now it means a market
free from regulation where all those things are given free, unbridled reign.

originally posted by: pexx421
Well, that depends on how you define “lobbying” doesn’t it? If by lobbying you mean people organizing and meeting with representatives in order
to persuade them of a specific need or cause, then yes. However if your definition of lobbying includes putting millions into the campaign
contributions, or guaranteeing lucrative multimillion dollar careers after their term ends, well that I think falls more into the realm of corruption
and treason. Lots of terms have been coopted nowadays. Invasion and bombing has become “spreading democracy”. Starving a population of food, money
and medicine has become “strong negotiation “, and bribery, corruption and graft has become “lobbying”. Seriously, the term “free market”
was originally a socialist term referring to a market free from interest/usury, monopolies, price fixing, and economic rent. Now it means a market
free from regulation where all those things are given free, unbridled reign.

Socialists want to give more power to those who take bribes, and who pull the levers of power. If they did not have that sort of power no one would be
trying to influence them with money and lucrative deals.

Where did you get that from? And how is a critical analysis of the policy decisions, which resulted in this mess of privatizations, not throwing a
wrench into this money lubricated mechanism of corruption?
And nope. You bringing up segregation is nothing but a good example of how far you'd have to travel back in time in order to find any positive effects
of lobbying. Well. Congrats, I guess?

Lobbying is a fundamental part of participatory democracy, and one of the means with which private citizens can petition their government. And you'd
see us denied that right.

There is no right that would be denied with ending socialism for the rich. It's a privilege, handed out while holding high hopes of increased
efficiency via trickle down effects. And then it failed to deliver.
Sure. From the oppressors standpoint equality might look like oppression, and I guess the oh-so-nobles felt the same as their usual fun with "primae
noctis" had been taken from them, but I really couldn't care less about your crocodile tears for special treatment. Nice try though.

Where did you get that from? And how is a critical analysis of the policy decisions, which resulted in this mess of privatizations, not throwing a
wrench into this money lubricated mechanism of corruption? And nope. You bringing up segregation is nothing but a good example of how far you'd have
to travel back in time in order to find any positive effects of lobbying. Well. Congrats, I guess?

You for instance, someone who defends socialism, is lamenting lobbying, one of the only means a private citizen or group can influence the government.
You are lamenting the power of private citizens, the “mechanism”, while reserving zero ire for the ones who accept bribes and draw up policy, the
government.

There is no right that would be denied with ending socialism for the rich. It's a privilege, handed out while holding high hopes of increased
efficiency via trickle down effects. And then it failed to deliver. Sure. From the oppressors standpoint equality might look like oppression, and I
guess the oh-so-nobles felt the same as their usual fun with "primae noctis" had been taken from them, but I really couldn't care less about your
crocodile tears for special treatment. Nice try though.

Primae noctis? Now we’re really travelling far back in time.

Sorry, but people are more wealthier, healthier, and happier than ever. It makes your insipid search for a socialist bogeyman all the more
embarrassing.

Isn't giving military veterans cheques or deposits, able or other wise a form of socialism?

I mean they hardly worked...long enough for it to secure a pension if they become disabled or traumitzed from live action and to not land a job since
most places don't hire killers or weapons, due to being over qualified or cheaper hiring someone else?

Idk, why can't they get normal job like normal people, where they should been dentists instead of chasing tv an it programming, an expect free things
at the end?

originally posted by: Specimen
Isn't giving military veterans cheques or deposits, able or other wise a form of socialism?

I mean they hardly worked...long enough for it to secure a pension if they become disabled or traumitzed from live action and to not land a job since
most places don't hire killers or weapons, due to being over qualified or cheaper hiring someone else?

Idk, why can't they get normal job like normal people, where they should been dentists instead of chasing tv an it programming, an expect free things
at the end?

Not at all. Those guys are getting a return for their blood sweat and tears. Some gave a little and some gave all. It is like when I work a job x
amount of years and qualify for retirement benefits. I do not draw any money and am a Veteran. It is those who made it thru a War who really deserve
our never ending love. Certainly, literally risking deadt elevates them to earlier retirement and their blood sacrifices as their part of this. Paid
in full I say with tears in my own eyes as it hurts my heart the people are so hollow to not see the sacrifices made so we can all speak freely.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.